A cap on executive salaries and benefits would contribute to the growth of meritocracy in creative professions. This is because more regular employees would gain financial benefits in the process. There is no loyalty without hope of mutual reward, so salary caps at the top would be an idea way to spur on creativity.
Nope. Salary caps would not make much difference or create anything that looks like a meritocracy. There are other ways to financially reward management that doesn't involve salary payment -- performance bonuses, stock options, expense accounts. Also, no matter how you cap the pay, cronyism will always be an issue.
Capping executive salaries would only be effective for those corporations with which that government had control. Since corporations annually consider moving their main office overseas for tax purposes, limiting executive salaries would be an easy way to give them a solid reason to move. Those executives that felt they were worth more than the salary cap would easily take offers from overseas companies. With the brightest executives moving overseas, corporations will follow just to get the talent.
Adding a cap on executive salaries and benefits would hit CEO's the hardest, especially those in financial services, but for the most part, all of them. Meritocracy is defined as the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability. I feel as though when we are talking about creative professions the people with more ability already to rise to the top, so I doubt salary caps could improve this.
Exactly the opposite. Caps on salaries don't make already wealthy families not wealthy, or less firmly entrenched, but instead just provide less incentive for people who want to become wealthy to make it to that level. People in the US work harder than almost any other country in the world.